Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

kyriacos writes "The Greek government is charging journalist Kostas Vaxevanis with violation of the data privacy law for publishing a list of about 2,000 Greeks who hold accounts with the HSBC bank in Switzerland. While more and more austerity measures are being taken against the people of Greece, there is still no investigation of tax evasion for the people on this list by the government. The list has been in the possession of the Greek government since 2010."

You joke, but my Greek friend (who's family has a house in Athens that they probably don't pay taxes one) freely admitted tax evasion is practically a national pastime in Greece. They really do consider it not only a right, but almost an obligation.

And you wonder how the Olympics almost bankrupted the government? Well, that attitude towards taxes makes the statement "oh, all of the tax revenues from increased tourism and business in Greece will more than make up for the expenses" a bit hard to back up...

Well, if your friend told you so, then by all means you're right to be modded "informative". Although the truth is that only a minority of the people tax evade in Greece. People who are not self-employed or business owners, get their taxes withheld from their monthly salary (and that makes about 60% of the greek workforce). They may or may not pay more or get some money back at the end of the year, depending on their total income/spending.

The are reasons that the view that we shouldn't pay taxes is somewhat more widespread in Greece than in other countries, though. When you have a corrupt government, and a broken down pubic education and healthcare system, you really don't like giving part of the wealth you produce to bankers, weapon dealers and friends of the govenment. Greece was one of the top countries in buying weapons (mainly from the U.S.) before the crisis started, and there were tons of scandals involving greek politicians getting money under the table to close some weapon deals.

Moreover, the greek tax system resembles the way the Mafia works. Every year, for the last ten years, the government makes you an offer. It'll ask for about 500-1000 euros (depending on how much income you actually declared) and in return they promise to never check your books for that year. The more you're tax evading, the more of a bargain this is. If you're not tax evading though, you'll probably take their offer anyway. Why? Because Greece has a very complicated tax system and if they check your tax declarations really close (which they'll do if you don't take their offer) they'll probably find something to fine you for an you'll end up paying more. Although this has slowed down a bit the last 2-3 years, as people don't have 500 euros to pay to the IRS anyway.

Oh, and the Olympics did not bankrupt the government because of tax evasion. They bankrupted the government because the construction companies in greece are in bed with the governement (the same ppl own the media and most of the banks). The government paid huge amounts for the olympic works to the construction companies. I still recall the case of a stadium that was to be renovated for a budget of a million euros. We ended up paying 20.

The money that greece is being given now (as debt), move in two directions: most of them, repay previous loans (so they go to banks), and some of them go directly to the greek banks. So, the german taxpayer loans money to the greek government. The money go straight to the greek and foreign banks and the greek people now have a debt towards the german (and the rest of the EU) people. It's not fair for the greek people and it's not fair for the german people.

The greek media all support the current status quo and for a good reason. There are no greek media that are economically succesfull. They have never been, not for one year. They survive with loans. The only reason that banks loan money year after year to the greek media although they know that they're not going to get paid back, is that the media in return support the current situation.

I don't know how it is over there, but most people I know are proud of it when they evade paying (some) taxes (in one of the richest countries of the world). Even the righteous ones.I think it's mainly that the way in which paying income taxes is done is experienced too much like a game. You get to fill in some (digital) form with lots of variables and if you find the right values, you get or save a bundle of money. It equates finding a tax loophole or even just being aware of certain deductibles to some ki

Taxes on cars and petrol do not COVER the costs or roads. Not even close. Roads are expensive. The car is NOT a milk cow as many believe, the car is in fact heavily subsidized from general taxes.

Just look at the public figures for the relevant department in your country. X + Y income from fuel and road taxes. Z expenditure. If Z is higher, then cars don't pay for roads, tax payers do. But everyone needs roads so that is okay. Just stop bleating how your fuel tax pays for everything, it doesn't.

If you're in Greece and don't already have your money out of the country, you're an idiot. This isn't about taxes. It's about Greece threatening to leave the euro area, switch to a local currency (bring back the drachma!), and printing money to get out of their financial disaster. People in Greece, as EU residents, have no obligation to participate in this. The EU encourages cross-border banking. So everybody with any significant cash is moving it to German, French, or Swiss banks in case the axe falls.

It's not about what makes things better, it's what is smart for you and your family... most people have it tough enough without losing half they have saved. Of course that doesn't include the people on the list most probably.

The Euro is inherently unstable, deposit guarantees should always be backed up by the printing press (or by the full faith and credit of the government who can turn on those presses, regardless of how independent the central bank is). That is what has mostly prevented bank runs during

The irony about gold is that the current high price is the result of an artificial bubble maintained by gold sellers pushing the staying power of gold. You didn't think those advertisements telling you to buy gold were for your own good, did you? No, they are to drive the price of gold high and keep it that way.

There is a legitimate point that inflation is what Greece, Spain, Italy and Portual need. Now ideally they would get there from a eurozone inflation of target of 4% and ease through this gradually (as the US generally has), but the other option will be for the Eurozone to break up, and they would likely be first to be kicked out (unless the germans leave first, which would help too).

Inflation devalues debt. Since one persons debt is anothers holding you can see the issue. But of course most people don't have a lot of money in cash assets. They have houses and stocks and so on.

Rightly, what he's complaining about is that reducing the value of a currency can make your labour worth less. This is true, and tied in concept to something in economics called nominal wage rigidity. Basically no one wants to take a face value pay cut. So to make your economy more competitive (more exports, more tourists, less imports, less of your people touring elsewhere) you want to reduce your own costs, and one way to do that is inflation.

Greece is essentially a balance of payments problem, all of the euro area is, combined with a monetary but not a fiscal union. If it wasn't for defence, medicare and medicaid and social security being *federal* in the US a lot of states would be in deep trouble right now. But because relatively rich areas keep sending money to poorer areas (especially areas that are poor because of the housing bubble and the now market bubble). What the greeks need is to decrease their costs relative to germany to attract investment, or get direct payments from germany. Either would work. The first, when in the Euro, is a mess, the Euro area could aim for a larger inflation target, essentially they'd decrease costs against everyone else at least, Greece might not be more competitive against germany but it would at least be more competitive against the US and Japan and China. The latter, which is essentially what the germans are talking about, European Federalism, seems to be a non starter politically.

So sure, he's shilling gold, and gold isn't a hedge against anything, it's just a metal that varies wildly in price, in part based on fears about inflation. Small persistent inflation (fiat currencies trend down) is a feature, not a defect of the system. But there's a kernel of truth to the fact that a lot of people in europe are looking at greece and figuring they want to having their money somewhere else, because if the Euro area starts kicking people out rather than actually solving problems a lot of people are going to get really fucked in the short term, and there they really might be better with bars of metal than cash. Incidentally, as other people have pointed out, this reality is why the barter system is picked back up, and is preventing major investment, so between that and austerity greece is only going to get worse unless there's some serious credible move towards an actual european solution, and given that, bars of any metal, even iron might be better than Greece Euros.

But yes, individually greece (portugal, spain etc.) having debt in euro's is about as good as having debt in US dollars, a currency they don't control, don't have a source of enough of, and no way to ease their way out of it.

Greece thankfully is an insignificant part of the Eurozone

True, but not. Greece is the first victim of a problem that will hit everyone in the Euro without reform. Even if there were only two countries in the Euro one of the two would have the same basic problem that greece has - they're forcibly less

but I really understand Germans looking at the problem and just thinking its better to kick Greeks out of Euro

Half of germany have buried their heads in the sand and believe it's some moral failure of the greeks in not paying their debts which has nothing to do with reality, the other half are living in a fantasy land of using this as leverage to force federalism "we'll give you money if you give power to brussels" so to speak. Germans of course, being descended from a federation of independent kingdoms doesn't have the same problem with federalism as everyone else in the euro area.

How fair is that? That its German taxes that will save a country that despite being in a fucked situation can not at least start pretending to be serious with tax?

And this puts you in the crowd of wanting to believe this is some great moral failure of the greeks. Their taxes as a % of gdp and spending as a % of GDP were not radically different from the rest of the euro area for the last decade, you're just buying rhetoric that wants people to feel good about forcing more and more austerity on them, and trying to destroy their country from the outside.

People need to learn that taxes are unavoidable in life.

People need to learn that every tax that can be avoided will be. Part of constructing a good tax code (that properly distributes tax burdens, properly defined however you want) is making sure you plan for loopholes. Europe has always had a problem with switzerland and the city states being tax havens, it's not like germans haven't been hiding their money in Switzerland and Lichtenstein for the the last 2 centuries after all, but they've learned to cope with it as best they can.

... and believe it's some moral failure of the greeks in not paying their debts which has nothing to do with reality

not that i am a fan of further unification; care to elaborate how it's not a failure of the greeks? Who took those massive debts and spent everything on hookers and blow? Martians? Oh, those evul bureaucrats in government who schemed with foreign bankers and cheated the honest uncorrupted greek society... but who voted for them? Santa Claus?Did they expect to load on debt ad infinitum to fund lavish welfare programs without any consequences?

Their taxes as a % of gdp and spending as a % of GDP were not radically different from the rest of the euro area for the last decade

so i guess you missed the fact they had no problem with lying their way into the monetary union, cooking the books every single year, marking everything to fantasy and doing that shady credit default swap business with GS to move shitton of expenses off the balance sheet. Yup, everything would be rainbows and ponies if only zee germans left them alone.

When the Germans got a list of tax-evaders, they prosecuted them. When the Greeks got a list of tax-evaders, they prosecuted the publisher of the list.

The Greeks have since they joined the EU never contributed a single dime, they have ALWAYS been a drain and now they want even more money. They should NEVER have been let into the EU, in fact the EU should have stopped north of France. The Benelux and maybe Germany and the Scandinavian countries, they share a common culture, the protestant work ethic. It is n

You didn't think those advertisements telling you to buy gold were for your own good, did you? No, they are to drive the price of gold high and keep it that way.

The folks that are swayed to buy gold by a 30 second TV spot aren't even a blip in the market. There's tens of thousands of tens in government reserves around the world, and individual investors are likely many decimal places away from even being noteworthy.

The difference between a Swiss bank and a bank in another European country is that Swiss banks don't share information about the account balance with the governments of their respective clients. So while having a Swiss bank account doesn't necessarily mean someone is evading taxes, the vast majority of the people evading taxes will use Swiss bank accounts.

The difference between a Swiss bank and a bank in another European country is that Swiss banks don't share information about the account balance with the governments of their respective clients. So while having a Swiss bank account doesn't necessarily mean someone is evading taxes, the vast majority of the people evading taxes will use Swiss bank accounts.

That's true. They're also useful for stashing stolen money and the proceeds of illegal drug transactions.

I'm swiss and I just want to inform you that almost anyone tries to hide some money or whatever from the government. For the past 60 years the folks in my surroundings (I live near the german border) have used accounts in germany to hide cash... others used italian banks or french ones...
If you want to open an account in germany the jolly fellow at the counter will ask you if the bank should sent the yearly statements to the tax office or to you, as you will be doing that... right ?
This is just the pot

Local currencies are bad how, exactly? It seems that participating in the euro has brought forced austerity measures and foreigners dictating local policy, wages, benefits, etc. When somebody else controls your money, it matters rather little who runs your government.

I mean, it's not like, to dip into recent history, the ex leaders of Iraq and Libya suddenly became bad guys. They were bad guys for years and we didn't care, other than the occasional one sided ass whipping they got once in a while. Now, w

For business, local currencies are a nightmare. The exchange rate risk becomes extreme, and eventually everyone just adds on an extra markup to make up for the risk. The result is that every consumer and business in the entire area just pays more money. This was what was happening in the Eurozone.

Imagine America, with every state having its own fiscal policy. Major transactions would be done in either New York, Texas or California dollars, and anyone that received a California dollar would immediately trade it for a New York dollar. If you went from Alibama to South Carolina, businesses wouldn't know how to exchange your currency. You would need to carry New York dollars for some exchanges, and Texas dollars for other exchanges. In this imaginary world, interstate trade would be a convoluted mess of foreign exchange transactions, and every middlemen would demand a cut.

That scenario was what was happening in Europe. As such, many countries developed a common monetary system around the Euro. The remaining two internationally easily convertable currencies for Europe are the British Pound and the Euro. For the most part, the British Pound is used for foreign transactions. EU businesses convert everything to Euros, as the Euro is the defacto liquid currency. For example: a Danish business will use Danish Krones and Euros, and a Hugarian business will use Hungarian Forints and Euros. To trade, the transaction will be priced in Euros, because both businesses use Euros.

The US has a huge commercial advantage with its federal reserve system, large size, and single common currency. Europe is trying to catch up. In the future, China's and India's currencies will be more important, as those countries grow in affluence and formalize their business practices. However, for the moment, it is difficult to explain to a US citizen what an incredible achievement the US economy is.

You are wrong on so many points it's absurd. Greece has had 30 years to get its finances in order, but corruption prevailed. Greece wants to stay in the Euro zone because leaving it would collapse the last of the international trade they do.The best thing for Greece in the short term would be bankrupcy because that would clear the debt, but in the long term it wouldn't change anything about its abysmal economy and the endemic tax dodging and would mean leaving the

Actually getting out of the Euro would probably be a smart thing, as they will frankly NEVER be able to pay back the loans and most likely the people will revolt over the measures being imposed on them in return for the loans.

Whether you agree or disagree with the direction Greece is headed you simply can't force the people to accept what essentially was a crooked deal between the large banks like JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs (Why am I not surprised that GS was involved? I swear they are Wolfram & Hart, and I wouldn't be shocked if their board was demons in Gucci suits) and the former government.

I don't understand how going back to the drachma would help them out of their current debt situation. Their debts are enumerated in euros so they have to pay them back in euros. If the switch to drachmas and then inflate the drachmas they'll just have to trade that many more drachmas to buy the euros they'll need to pay off the debts.

But I can see that it's to one's advantage to have one's wealth counted in euros, which are more stable than any re-established currency is likely to be.

However they are Greek and in ego terms, defaulting on debt makes them a minor third rate country. So they are stuck between a rock and a 'stupid' place. Cheating on taxes at every level, no taxes to pay for reasonable social welfare and of course wholly unreasonable major government to private corporate contracts with fat profit margins, the US corporate waged war on the Euro because the Euro was becoming perceived as a threat to the US Fed and was far to stable, ups and downs are needed for real profit.

Although the Greek government is close to running a primary budget surplus (ie, before interest payments) it still needs further official loans to honour obligations due this year, notably redemptions of bonds held by the European Central Bank (ECB), which were excluded from the restructuring in March that slashed the face value of €200 billion of debt held by private bondholders by over half. If the lifeline from the EFSF were cut off by its creditor nations, Greece would be unable to pay those debts. And if the ECB makes it a matter of principle not to lend (or permit the Bank of Greece to lend) to banks against collateral consisting of bonds and guarantees from a government in default, then it in turn would cut Greece off. Greek banks currently rely upon some €130 billion of central-bank funding. Without the ECB money the entire banking system would collapse. If the flow of money was reduced, and the conditions it is lent on tightened, the Greek government might start to issue IOUs to its workers to make up the shortfall. If the flow stopped, leaving the banks no euros to pay out, a new currency would be the only alternative.

The government would redenominate domestic bank assets and liabilities into drachma and insist that domestic contracts, such as pay and prices, be also set in drachma. Capital controls would be necessary because the drachma would immediately fall against the euro, possibly losing 50% or more of its value in a trice.

In the short term Greece's economic agony—its economy shrank by 13% from 2007 to 2011 and is expected to contract by almost 5% this year—would intensify. A precipitous exit without preparation would leave the country without notes and coin. The surrounding chaos would paralyse economic activity, causing consumers and businesses to stop spending. Economists at UBS, a Swiss bank, have estimated that the cost of a catastrophic exit might amount to 40-50% of GDP in the first year.

That figure assumes that Greece would have to leave the EU as well as the euro, and thus lose access to the single market. On strict legal grounds that may be the case, in part because exit requires capital controls, and those controls are illegal under EU treaties. In practice European policymakers are making it clear they would do their utmost to keep Greece in the EU. Assuming such helpfulness, Mark Cliffe, an economist at ING, a Dutch bank, reckons that the effect would be less. He puts the first-year extra loss of output at 7.5%.

Their debts are enumerated in euros so they have to pay them back in euros.

They simply state "All debts will be paid back with Drachma. If you don't like that, let us know, and we'll cancel our debt with you." People would sign up to take the drachma, if the alternative was nothing. One or two would hold out, and Greece would default on those, and nobody would care, because the people who refused to take the offered drachma would be blamed.

True - if it were up to capitalism the government would not be int the state they are in. A lot of citizens might be homeless, underfed, and sick, and Greeks rioting in the streets, but the government wouldn't be broke.

Then again, apparently Greeks will riot in the streets either way, so in the end it may not have made much of a difference.

You are confusing capitalism with economic liberalism. Capitalism works very well with socialist policies, including the so called social democracy ideology. If you have any trouble letting that sink in, just know this: the free market and invisible hand stuff do work, but understand that the government can also be an economic actor just like any other corporation or private individual. So, just because the government shelters the homeless, feeds teh hungry and heals the sick, it doesn't mean it can't do

In the US, a good portions of the towns were actually built and created by businesses due to capitalism. Capitalism needs productive worker. This seems counter to your concept and ideals. Of course there are those who will attempt to abuse their positions, but that's not really a common thing.

The euro isn't threatened by Greece staying or going, they're too small to actually matter much. The Euro is threatened by what caused Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain to be in serious messes, which is the same problem that will eventually chip away at all of the countries that aren't germany - germany is the strongest economy in the Euro area, and the biggest, so they will be dragged down by everyone else eventually, but Euro policy rests on german exports.

The Euro was constructed with the idea that they would get a currency and settle the political and fiscal (EU budget powers basically) issues later. Because the Uk wasn't going along with one provision or another, other people wanted their own deals, no one really wanted to transfer power to Brussels, because, as you rightfully point out, they're not apparently doing a very good job.

Unfortunately, that system isn't sustainable, it happened to hit Greece, and Ireland and Spain and Portugal first, but the problem is fundamental to the EU and Euro area, and is not going to go away if greece is gone. Greece leaving the Euro area would be good for greece ultimately, though obviously the transition would be... unpleasant.

Currency is involved. The USA is set to owe more than the GDP and will, in a practical sense, not be able to pay it back. The US people do not have the ability to weather a Japanese-style long-term depression to fix the debt. Instead, the US would print more money, raising the GDP (as measured in USD) without raising the debt, helping quantitatively ease the problem. When you don't control the currency you hold, you don't have that option, making currency an issue in a discussion on debt.

10% of a $1000 item is $100. Haul ten of those items out in a day and that's a pretty good salary. And of they get caught, well, they may be locked up, but look on the bright side, they get to meet and date people with names like Bubba and have 3 hot meals a day and a warm dry cot to lay their heads on at night.

They also buy security systems and dogs. "rich" has little to do with income. If I had $1,000,000,000,000 and kept it in the bank in a 0% interest account, I'd show $0 income, but have lots of good stuff, and the ability to get lots more of good stuff. Bobby Brown made what, $5,000,000 a year and went bankrupt? And OJ, and Willie Nelson, and lots others with lots of income have ended up with a negative net worth. So no, making lots doesn't make one wealthy, and pissing off a person able to hire the population of a small town full time to do nothing but look for you is rarely a good idea.

It's not hard to leave the collective. Emigration isn't that hard. I did it once to get out of the USA (it'll be very post-apocalyptic when it does fail, and having guns to prepare for the looting and lawlessness is less attractive than just moving to a place that won't fall as hard or as fast). So just grow up in the system, hating it. Then, when you are old enough, leave.

No, it's not obvious. Because why would you be posting a question like that on an English-language, US-based tech site instead of a political forum that has least something to do with Finland. Or just find a penpal or something.

I wish them luck, but you are not following me, I am not talking about the majority of Finns, I am wondering about that minority that do not agree with the system. I don't care how much the majority is brainwashed into it, how it is 'ingrained', all that, I am genuinely interested in the other side of it, those who detest, dissent, disagree, do you understand my question? It's likely that you are not the person to answer it, I am posing that question, it's out there, somebody who understands it may leave

Any society of greater than about 10 people is going to have a proportion who do not agree with the general consensus. Therefore you get some non-collectivist Scandanavians and you get some collectivist Americans who haven't fallen for the free-market-is-perfect brainwashing (note majority culture and government are intertwined, it would be a mistake to attribute this to the government alone).

Unfortunately for those minorities, rules tend to need to be universal, so the answer to your question is that they

I haven't heard people complaining about the openness of the tax system.

But let me shock you some more: most fines are not specified in absolute amounts. Instead, they are specified as percentages of your reported annual income. When the police stop you for doing 20 km/h over the speed limit, they pull out their smartphones and look up your previous year's tax filing to figure out the amount of your fine. Some fortunate individuals have had to pay well over a hudred thousand dollars for speeding.

Again, there's logic there. While in the U.S. you are sometimes ordered to do community service, in Finland you don't have to take time off your precious profession. Instead, the government rules that for a number of days, you work for the community in your present job. In other words, the government confiscates the wages you earned during those days. You get a lesson but your career is not jeopardized.

The police don't get any special bonus for harassing wealthy individuals (the fines go to the state treasury and the police report to the Ministry of the Interior), and only a handful of people in the whole country are wealthy enough to actually hire servants.

In the U.S., on the other hand, you have posters threatening a "$1000 fine for littering." That fine could literally make some children starve while the rich people couldn't care less.

I am talking about the Rule of Law, where government in all its actions is supposed to be bound by rules that are fixed and announced beforehand, so that based on this knowledge individuals can rely to plan their personal affairs

And if the "rule of law" fixes the fine to 2% of annual income (as measured by an average of the highest 2 of the last 3 year's tax returns), what is wrong with that fixed and announced rule?

That was utter bullshit, so why would you expect him to understand it? That law does not discriminate. Everyone convicted of the same crime pays the same percentage. Now if, instead, certain people had a special tag next to their name, like, say Duke, or Count, or Earl, and that meant they paid a smaller percentage fine than anyone who didn't have that special tag, then THAT would be discrimination.

So a law can't say that a person has to pay x% of their income if they break a certain law? If that kind of a law is wrong, then what about taxes? Should people all be required to pay X per year, without any regard of what they earned?

But Finland has a better Economy then USA, a lower debt, and a higher standard of living, a much lover crime rate and fewer in prison, and on and on. please go to CIA world fact book and check your facts. Finland is a much better country to live in on all most all areas, and despite being heavily regulated by the government, they would consider them self living in a much more liberal country then the us. Freedom is not only about money. again please go to CIA world fact book and check it out, I have never h

To me the very concept of collectivism is as repulsive as for example the idea of murdering 100,000,000 newborn by drowning them all in a tub filled with H2SO4. Do you know what I mean? And that is much fewer deaths and suffering than collectivism actually caused.

If you count all the taxes that people have to pay (in the upper brackets of-course), including the spread between corporate and other earnings (and not counting sale an property taxes), this can get higher than 90%, if you count the death taxes as well.

Last I read, the death taxes are paid by 0.6% of estates. But, for some reason, are a "major" issue affecting most Americans. Oh, and being in the top 10% of wage earners, I pay less than 10% of my income as federal income tax. Including all taxes I pay, I pay less than 20% tax. Taxes are low. Well under your numbers. A person in the "upper brackets" of income has less than 20% of their income as earned, the rest taxed at 15% or less. So 40% of 20% and 15% of 80% = 20%, and that's not counting deduct

That's not the real scandal, or should I say is part of it. The real scandal is that the list has been in the government's hands for a couple of years and it has done nothing about it ( it's the same list leaked by a swiss man, and bought and used by the german, US and other governments to collect taxes ). Ex-ministers are saying that a) either they couldn't use the list because the data was not acquired legally or b) we gave the list to the greek IRS but they didn't do anything. There is even an ex-minister ( current leader of pasok ) who admitted he took the usb stick with the list to his home after he resigned from his position.

I think by mentioning that the list was already in the Greek govt's hands for a couple of years means this guy was acting as a kind of whistleblower, or possibly working with a whistleblower. IF that was the point, then acting out of a moral obligation to reveal evaders when the govt can't support itself makes this arrest appear immoral, perhaps somewhat despicable.

Just conjecture on my part. Honestly, I don't know why this particular "journalist arrested" story made it to/. Maybe though it's the fault of

If half the population doesn't agree with a law then the law is a sham.

That is such a dumb statement. I would wager (based on no more evidence than your own wager was based) that half the population wouldn't pay taxes if it was left up to them. Does that mean the entire tax system is a sham?

That's not the real scandal, or should I say is part of it. The real scandal is that the list has been in the government's hands for a couple of years and it has done nothing about it

In other words, the second and third sentences in the summary:

"While more and more austerity measures are being taken against the people of Greece, there is still no investigation of tax evasion for the people on this list by the government. The list has been in the possession of the Greek government since 2010."

I don't know if anybody on/. understands the principle of austerity, but it seems that most of the planet doesn't understand it.

Austerity is reduction of spending by government, reduction of size of government. The checks that governments sends are supposed to be reduced or completely cut, stopped. The government cannot afford payments, the people cannot afford the government.

That's what austerity is or should be.

Instead the politicians have convinced huge number of people that austerity is supposed to b

If a lot of the (ha!) "truly productive" check-out and leave Greece it would probably be a net gain for Greece.

- yeah, because the world is full of examples where countries with only poor people became great economic engines, pulling everybody out of dirt (and doing it without actually turning their entire populations into slave labor and the nation into a meat grinder).

Working and generating wealth is different from owning property and making money from it.

- it's called savings and investments. You can save your money, invest it and it works. Yes, the money works and you allowed it to work by collecting it and not spending it, that's why economies need savers - to allow investments to occur and allo

Apparently not. That's why banks are no longer interested in courting the middle class to put money in savings. They're much more interested in handing out loans from fiat money and collecting rapacious interest rates on it.

Collecting various forms of rent is not an economically productive activity.

yeah, because the world is full of examples where countries with only poor people became great economic engines, pulling everybody out of dirt (and doing it without actually turning their entire populations into slave labor and the nation into a meat grinder).

But that's not evidence against it being possible, or even likely. The productive are who make the poor. If they were gone, there would be less poor people.

In October 2001, Birkenfeld began working at UBS in Geneva, Switzerland, handling private banking, primarily for clients located in the United States. In 2005, he learned that UBS's secret dealings with American customers violated an agreement the bank had reached with the IRS.

He resigned from UBS in October 2005 and provided written whistleblower complaints to Peter Kurer, Head Counsel for UBS, and other UBS senior executives regard

Hey many billions -- nay, TRILLIONS -- of dollars have wealthy individuals from around the globe hidden in Swiss bank accounts?

Under any other circumstances, nations would ban trade with Switzerland unless it shared bank account data with their local tax office. Alas, it's the same fat cats that run our countries who shield their wealth in Switzerland.

It was eye opening when that disgruntled IT fellow burned a copy of bank account data onto a couple of DVD's and then embarked on a global tour of selling to each country a list of their citizens who had money stashed in Switzerland.

Slow down there, cowboy. You make it sound like I want to send in the cavalry.

I wouldn't force Switzerland to abandon its "privacy" laws.(I think the inverted commas are warranted, don't you? I mean, what are they really protecting?)

I would simply like to see local jurisdictions refuse to trade with Switzerland unless they provided reciprocal financial information on their citizens. (Many countries have already requested such information -- even writing very stern letters! -- and have received nothing in re

Hey many billions -- nay, TRILLIONS -- of dollars have wealthy individuals from around the globe hidden in Swiss bank accounts?

Since you ask, around 21-32 trillion: as much as the US and Japanese economies combined.http://www.taxjustice.net/cms/upload/pdf/The_Price_of_Offshore_Revisited_Presser_120722.pdfThat includes all off shore accounts, not just Swiss.

My statement was in relevance to the last sentence of the article summary. The damage has already been done by the Greek government. Even if they did now seek to prosecute the tax evaders, they would still be in a financial mess; the white-collar criminals would merely be the next scapegoat in the line. In a nutshell, I'm pointing the finger at the Greek gov't for mismanaging the money that they did take in, rather than being responsible and accountable with the funds of their people.

You need to distinguish between an economic crisis and a government budget crisis. Taxing can get you out of a government budget crisis. Lowering taxes when you don't have enough taxes to cover your current spending will just as surely produce one.

"Government budget crisis"?
When governments excessively spend money they don't have, it is inevitably creating an "economic crisis" down the line. Proper budgeting means you don't spend more money than the sum of your tax revenue. If you DO happen to need that extra coverage, you effectively "IOU" the people and spend less during the next fiscal period to compensate. The numbers may be massive, the figures vast and more complex than your average checkbook, but math is still math.

This is a classic case of government panicking when they lose control of information and thus power. I find when a government spends too much time controlling information they tend to forget what they are actually supposed to be doing. I love how this compares to a functioning government like Norway where you can access people's tax records online. There are a few odd rules though; there is a time window and I believe that people know who has accessed their records. Thus the open information includes knowing which of your neighbours are nosy. But the best part is the first year they went online the public found famous rich people claiming $150,000 in income resulting in investigations.

In 2007, Birkenfeld decided to tell the DOJ what he knew about UBS's practices. At the same time, he wanted to take advantage of a new federal whistleblower law that could pay him up to 30% of any tax revenue recouped by the IRS as a result of Birkenfeld's information. Birkenfeld also wanted immunity from prosecution for his part in UBS's transactions. In April 2007, Birkenfeld's counsel sent the DOJ a summary of the Birkenfeld's information. The DOJ responded that it was not part of the IRS's whistleblower program and that it would not grant Birkenfeld immunity.Nonetheless, Birkenfeld met with the DOJ. When communications between Birkenfeld and the DOJ stalled, Birkenfeld contacted the Securities and Exchange Commission, the IRS, and the U.S. Senate.In April 2008, Birkenfeld's lawyers told the DOJ that he would assist the DOJ in return for immunity. One or two months later, Birkenfeld was arrested. The DOJ's top tax lawyer said, "With regard to whistleblowers: those who seek to be treated as true whistleblowers need to know they must come in early and give complete and truthful disclosures.... Mr. Birkenfeld did not come in and give complete and truthful disclosures. Therefore, he is not entitled to whistleblower status."In September 2012, the IRS Whistleblower Office awarded Birkenfeld $104 million as a whistleblower.

I would spend 3 years in jail for $104 million dollars. I disagree with his prosecution and arrest, but he's hardly a victim, or if he is please make me a victim too.

Also they got more than $700 million in fines/taxes from his information. So the notion that they aren't following up on his information is false.

Are you suggesting that the woman in your story was one of the powerful elite?

I don't know exactly what the laws are, but isn't it illegal to use illegally-obtained evidence in court? I assume this is to prevent the police from using illegal means to collect evidence. Like I said, I don't know exactly what the laws are, but it seems like this might be pertinent in this case.

Yeah, the story stinks. It sounds like a lie told by a man against his ex-wife. Likely she also had custody of their children, and he was willing to do anything to get them back.

Did he send it to the "other state" where the murder happened? That's the only place that has jurisdiction over he murder. Also note, at the time I post this, he hasn't responded with any other information, making it look more like a false story, though "I know a man" sounds fishy. At least he picked a state where two-party is

This is not true. There are ten states that are all party notification states (that is they require that all parties agree to be recorded):
California Connecticut Florida Maryland Massachusetts Montana (requires notification only) Nevada New Hampshire Pennsylvania Washington
In addition, if the conversation takes place between one of these states and a state that allows one-party notification, the stricter laws apply. There is however another problem with the story the OP poste